Column distorted nature of meeting

Published 5:36 pm, Monday, December 10, 2012

I was forwarded an article written by Greenwich Time columnist Bob Horton that contained his "take" on the Cos Cob neighborhood's efforts to stop a development that would forever change their immediate environment. In particular, Mr. Horton's view on the meeting that took place at the Cos Cob Fire House was so off the mark, and so incendiary, that I am compelled to respond.

First, he takes state Sen. Scott Frantz and I to task for showing up and "(choosing) to encourage the crowd's `to the mattresses' mentality." He basically accused us of dividing rather than uniting.

I wonder if he was even in the room. If he was, then his article was a blatant lie. If he wasn't in the room, what kind of journalism is he practicing? Did he go off of quotes he read?

If the latter is true, then factual research would have provided him with the truth: We, as elected officials, have a duty to show up when constituents ask us to and listen to their concerns. Moreover, just because we are elected officials does not mean we can't have opinions. While Sen. Frantz and I have privately and publicly voiced support for the Greenwich Reform Synagogue to find a home that meets their needs and goals, we feel that transforming a neighborhood, and thus setting a precedent where no neighborhood would be immune to commercial development, is not the way to do it. Churches and synagogues are both vital components of our community, for sure, but that doesn't mean we can put them any place we like if we have the money to retain legal counsel and former P & Z members.

Personally, I have been clear about that from the start, even as I met with both Greenwich Reform Synagogue President Robert Birnbaum and a few of the neighbors. I grew up in that neighborhood and it means a lot to me, but I would be an advocate, and have been, for other areas that were targets for inconsistent zoning-change attempts.

So, we went, we listened, we advocated, and we pledged to help in any way we can, and did so in a calm manner where we advised all to "speak with one voice." How is that dividing?

Second, I know many people in the neighborhood, and grew up with the Caravella family, a point I made known at the meeting. This is not an easy place to be in, given one party consists of lifelong friends, and the other friends fighting for the quality of life they now feel is being threatened by a complete zoning change. To characterize them the way Mr. Horton did is an insult and one that deserves an apology from him to them. His article suggests his mind was made up before he even took his pen to paper.

Dr. Robert Kennedy's perk package as president (now former) of the state Board of Regents is typical in higher education. So it should not be surprising that Kennedy asked for the package. The real issue that should be explored in depth, is why Governor Malloy, an experienced public executive and attorney, agreed to the package.

The governor should have been thinking "out of the box." In negotiations with Kennedy, the governor could have told Kennedy that the state has financial problems, that increases in higher education costs and tuition must be controlled, and that Kennedy must lead by example.

By agreeing to the full package of perks, the governor's message was, "business as usual for higher education is OK." No wonder Kennedy authorized those behind-the-scenes raises.